Perspectives on ENS, ORDI Tokens and Related Questions Answered

·

1. Views on DAOs

DAOs were one of the earliest blockchain sectors I was optimistic about, dating back to around 2018–2019.

At that time, I viewed DAOs with far greater enthusiasm than DeFi for several key reasons:

My ideal DAO would be:
👉 A fully autonomous system governed by smart contracts capable of self-sustaining project development without human intervention.

Current Reality vs. Ideal

Despite years of experimentation:

Future Outlook

I maintain that truly autonomous DAOs will emerge, likely featuring:

2. Evaluation of ENS

ENS (Ethereum Name Service) holds a paradoxical position:

Key Observations:

3. ORDI Team Structure

Understanding ORDI requires distinguishing between:

Team Definition Clarification:

👉 ORDI operates teamlessly post-launch, whereas its founders' later developments constitute separate initiatives.

FAQ Section

Q1: Can DAOs realistically replace traditional corporations?
A: Not in their current form. Future viable DAOs will likely hybridize decentralized governance with professionalized core teams.

Q2: Why hasn't ENS capitalized on its early lead?
A: Potential factors include insufficient protocol upgrades and slow adaptation to layer-2 ecosystems.

Q3: Is holding ORDI similar to holding Bitcoin?
A: Conceptually yes—both are foundational assets—but ORDI lacks Bitcoin's network effects and institutional adoption.

Q4: What makes a DAO successful?
A: Critical mass of engaged stakeholders, clear governance mechanics, and sustainable tokenomics—all still evolving.

Q5: Are ENS domains worth collecting?
A: High-value short names retain utility, but broader adoption depends on ENS revitalizing its ecosystem.

Q6: How do inscription tokens differ from smart contract tokens?
A: Inscriptions are immutable data entries, whereas smart contract tokens enable programmable functionality.